IPC Healthcare, formerly known as IPC the Hospitalist Company (IPC), has agreed to settle a False Claims Act lawsuit that alleged that the company encouraged its physicians to submit billing codes for more expensive care than the services that were actually being administered. IPC then submitted these false claims to government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, for reimbursement. The case was filed by Bijan Oughatiyan, a physician who was employed by IPC from 2003 through 2008. IPC has agreed to resolve Oughatiyan’s allegations for $60 million. For his role as a whistleblower in filing this qui tam lawsuit, Oughatiyan is set to receive approximately $11 million.

Founded in 1995, IPC was acquired by hospital staffing company Team Health Holdings Inc. in 2015. IPC employs more than 2,000 acute care physicians, known as hospitalists, within 1,900 medical facilities across 28 states. IPC is one of the leading hospitalist companies in the United States; in 2014, the company boasted over $690 million in revenue.

Oughatiyan filed his lawsuit within the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in 2009. Within his Complaint, Oughatiyan alleges that IPC engaged in a deceptive plan to increase reimbursement rates from government healthcare programs by providing training to hospitalists that encouraged the practice of upcoding. This scheme involved physicians submitting billing codes through IPC’s electronic payment system for services that were more expensive than the actual care that was being provided. IPC would in turn submit these inflated bills to government healthcare programs for payment, effectively misappropriating taxpayer funds that are allocated to assist the most financially vulnerable individuals, as well as senior citizens.

Furthermore, the Complaint alleges that IPC engaged in a physician incentive plan by compensating hospitalists with financial bonuses that were based on the amount that they billed. In some instances, these bonuses exceeded a physician’s base salary. Oughatiyan alleges that the company closely monitored the billing activities of the hospitalists and would individually address the physicians about their need to maintain certain billing rates. Additionally, IPC’s electronic system allowed for its hospitalists to view the billing behaviors of other physicians to determine if they were billing at equal rates, and to assess areas where higher billing codes could be utilized.

In recent years, the laws of the United States have undergone a whistleblower revolution. Federal and state governments now offer substantial monetary awards to individuals who come forward with information about fraud on government programs, tax fraud, securities fraud, and fraud involving the banking industry. Whistleblowers also now have important legal protections, designed to prevent retaliation and blacklisting.

The law firm of Tycko & Zavareei LLP works on the cutting edge of this whistleblower revolution, taking on even the most complex and confidential whistleblower...

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558 Telephone (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.